Bottom set, lead out, or check ?

[beardyian]

We go to a flop 7 handed.

That is the important piece of information that tells you that you should lead out.

 

[blankoblanco]

I don't think checking here is allthat bad of a move really; generally with that many people in SOMEONE will bet, and even if not, there's a fair chance that the turn card is a non straight or flush filler that doesn't pose much danger to you.

I personally favor leading out, since it's less dangerous and better conceals your hand, but I'm really surprised the voting is so lopsided. I have a feeling some of the people who said lead out would, if in the position themselves, very likely check, even if it is a bit dangerous.

 

[tenbob]

you.

, but I'm really surprised the voting is so lopsided. I have a feeling some of the people who said lead out would, if in the position themselves, very likely check, even if it is a bit dangerous.

Im also very susprised at the vote, maybe i should have made it a private poll, maybe that would have changed things. I think the correct "safe" play is to simply bet your hand, but checking is not an "incorrect" play as such either.

 

[F Paulsson]

Let me get this str8 someone is sitting there with 36 off possibly and your gonna give them a free card? common thin the crowd lead out

Thinning the crowd is not a reason to bet here. In fact, it's quite possibly a reason to check. There is no free card in the deck that is going to make 6-3 be able to pay the price I'd set on this turn if I checked the flop.

Here's the kicker though: If I check this flop, and everyone else does, and then I check the turn because I want to trap someone, and again everyone checks, and then this guy hits is runner-runner inside straight on the river, he's not winning a big pot, and we're not losing a big one. For 6 other players to check down, no one must have anything, and if no one has anything, we could as well be holding 3-3 as 2-2 in this spot.

Leading out is right, but "thinning the crowd" is NOT one of the reasons why.

And TB: There are no - or at least very very few - people who actually play as well as they post. I strongly advocate leading out here, but I can't say that I necessarily would in a live tournament situation.

 

[colin_147]

I dont think their is a right or wrong answer here. I think your decision may change if you had a better read on the table, whether it is passive or aggressive. At this early stage and with so many limpers, my hand is pretty well disguised and a weak looking check-call would probably be the play for me, depending on the number of callers if a player bets out

I am not too sure where the "why give them a free card" argument comes from in this scenario. Sure, there are 7 limpers, and sure you could easily be facing some guy who has hit 2 pair and has the draw against you. But in this situation this person will almost certainly be betting out, giving you the opportunity to raise. A bet out by you, followed by a re-raise by your opponent will almost certainly push the other players out of the pot, reducing your earning potential. This is a scenario you want to avoid - a check by you, followed by a nice bet by the player to your immediate left may well bring some callers, giving you the opportunity to raise all in and maximise what is almost certainly the best hand at this stage. Like TB said, dont assume all your opponents will be checking. In fact, id like to see what odds would be on offer for a check round by 7 players with a nice few chips in the pot! It happened here, but dont assume this will be the case everytime, cos it certainly wont happen often.

At this moment, its unlikely your up against a set of 7's or 9's, as these would likely have brought a preflop raise. Letting your opponent catch a turn card, as was the case here, followed by a weak-looking check-call.

I am not a huge fan of slow playing small sets, or even big preflop hands but I think its the best choice in this situation, especially with those nice big stacks that fish like to gamble with at early stages of tournaments

 

[KerouacsDog]

i lead out with a bet of 1/2 to 3/4 the pot. I dont want anyone to get a free card, particularly anyone with T8, etc. you have to bet for information on this hand, to see where you are. yes, you have a killer hand at the moment, but it can be beat by someone drawing.

 

[robwhufc]

Agree with most posts here, on both sides of the argument! With 7 seeing the flop and a ragged board, i think i'd take a gamble here and check, hoping someone bets (6 chances someone will). If they did i'd call, not re-raise (hopefully with 3 or 4 people in the hand still), then lead the betting off hard next round - hopefully this would have disguised your hand a bit, and give you a bit more action on later streets. I think people will be more inclined to call a bet from late, than in 1st position (with 6 players still to act). If there were less people in the hand (3 or 4) i'd probably be more inclined to lead off with a bet as there is more of a chance that the hand will be checked all the way round (as Dorkus said).

 

[F Paulsson]

bet for information on this hand, to see where you are.

If I bet 300, and I get called in two places, where am I and what information have I gotten that I can use to make better decisions later in the hand?

 

[medeiros13]

Like Rob, I do find myself agreeing with both sides of this arguement to some extent. However, I without a doubt would lead out with a half pot sized bet. I understand the flop is harmless but that's exactly why I lead out with a half pot bet. The players with the overcards will probably call and you thin out the rags. If the turn presents a big card, you lead out again with the half pot sized bet hoping someone who hit TP thinks you're making a semibluff at the pot. What happened to the getting OP to put chips in the middle when you hit a big hand?? I don't think a check raise gets that done as effectively as putting in a value bet does.

 

[tenbob]

I without a doubt would lead out with a half pot sized bet.

What happened to the getting OP to put chips in the middle when you hit a big hand?? .

Im a greedy poker player. I certainly dont want to win a pot of 2K here. I WANT SOMEONE TO STACK OFF !!!!!!! And i have the ideal hand to do it with. If i lose, or run into an overset then thats just poker.

 

[KerouacsDog]

If I bet 300, and I get called in two places, where am I and what information have I gotten that I can use to make better decisions later in the hand?

2 callers? ok, so you figure they have some kind of hand. maybe a straight draw, maybe top pair, maybe overcards. turn card is key. if it's a danger card: 6,8,T for a straight, then again i would bet to see where I am in the hand. u want a high card so someone possibly pairs up.
this checking I really dont like. IMO if you flop a big hand, then bet it. dont go over the top, but you want some action.

 

[F Paulsson]

this checking I really dont like. IMO if you flop a big hand, then bet it. dont go over the top, but you want some action.

I agree with betting rather than checking, definitely. I just strongly feel that the reason that dwarves all the others is "for value" yet it seems to be one of the least mentioned ones.

To me, it's a little bit like saying that you're late for the bus and asking for advice and someone recommends "running for it, because exercise is good for you." It's the right thing to do, and it's a bonus that you get some exercise, but you're running because you want to catch the bus.

Setting a price to draw, getting information, disguising your hand, all of these are good reasons to bet. But in this hand, to me, they're icing on the cake. I want to bet because it's the best way to get more money in the pot with the best hand. Focusing too much on the other reasons for why leading out may be right is a tendency towards Fancy Play Syndrome.

 

[loopmeister]

Awesome thread, this.

I've found that slowplaying sets is the norm rather than the exception, that leading out after hitting is the true deception play. It's the old double-bluff. I really think that a lot of opposition start discounting the chance that you hold a set if you bet out.

 

[KerouacsDog]

Awesome thread, this.

I've found that slowplaying sets is the norm rather than the exception, that leading out after hitting is the true deception play. It's the old double-bluff. I really think that a lot of opposition start discounting the chance that you hold a set if you bet out.

good point bud, hadnt really thought of it that way.

 

[KerouacsDog]

I agree with betting rather than checking, definitely. I just strongly feel that the reason that dwarves all the others is "for value" yet it seems to be one of the least mentioned ones.

To me, it's a little bit like saying that you're late for the bus and asking for advice and someone recommends "running for it, because exercise is good for you." It's the right thing to do, and it's a bonus that you get some exercise, but you're running because you want to catch the bus.

Setting a price to draw, getting information, disguising your hand, all of these are good reasons to bet. But in this hand, to me, they're icing on the cake. I want to bet because it's the best way to get more money in the pot with the best hand. Focusing too much on the other reasons for why leading out may be right is a tendency towards Fancy Play Syndrome.

totally agree with the main reason 'for value'. If you have a nut hand(not that this hand is the nuts, btw) your 'mission' is to get all of your chips/other callers chips in by the river. you check the flop you're potentially missing out on a round of betting.

 

[blankoblanco]

I am not too sure where the "why give them a free card" argument comes from in this scenario. Sure, there are 7 limpers, and sure you could easily be facing some guy who has hit 2 pair and has the draw against you. But in this situation this person will almost certainly be betting out, giving you the opportunity to raise.

If someone has 2 pair, you're going to get just as much or more money in the pot if you lead out anyway! You're not worried about 2 pair drawing out a full house on you, because at this point you're pretty much not going to be able to prevent 2 pair from playing. If they get lucky, so be it. But what about: 33, 44, 55, 66, 88, 56, 68, T8, JT. These are all hands that can become better than yours on the turn, but it's doubtful any of them would lead out with a bet. With 6 other limpers, plenty of these hands are very possible.

If it's checked around, a seemingly harmless 3 or 4 might hit the turn, and the player holding 33 or 44 just hit jackpot. Good luck getting away from the hand then. If you lead out, you might get called by a couple of straight drawing hands, but all those pocket pairs will almost definitely fold.

 

[Four Dogs]

I want to respond before I read what anyone else has said. My first reaction was to bet the hand now because even though you have a set, it's bottom set and you're up against 6 limpers. Chances are good that one or more of them have already caught a pair or better. You do NOT want that many limpers to see another card. So, so, so.... Check! Yup you NEED to check this hand. It seems very unlikely to me that with 6 limpers to act, somebody isn't going to bet. Not impossible, but unlikely. The last thing you want to do is face 2, 3 or more of them on the next round, so you need to make hay now. You've probably got the best hand and you still need to get value for it. It would be a shame if you bet strong, only to see the table fold back around to you, or worse, they all call. If you check, you may get a bet or 2 and possibly a string of them. Then you make make your move. I don't think you need advice from me on what that move should be.

 

[Bombjack]

I'm beginning to think checking is not such a bad option.

Seat 1: Dinostar15 ($42.60 in chips)
Seat 2: daz5daz5 ($17 in chips)
Seat 3: hella0uts ($28.50 in chips)
Seat 5: LukCarm ($97.50 in chips)
Seat 6: Bombjack_x [5C,5S] ($27.30 in chips)
Seat 7: buddha boy ($24.35 in chips)
Seat 8: AdrenalineJ ($11.65 in chips)
Seat 9: Emoryplaya ($21.85 in chips)
Seat 10: mikeybonz3 ($51.20 in chips)
ANTES/BLINDS
hella0uts posts blind ($0.15), LukCarm posts blind ($0.25).

PRE-FLOP
Bombjack_x calls $0.25, buddha boy folds, AdrenalineJ calls $0.25, Emoryplaya folds, mikeybonz3 folds, Dinostar15 calls $0.25, daz5daz5 calls $0.25, hella0uts calls $0.10, LukCarm checks.

FLOP [board cards 5H,7C,9S ]
hella0uts checks, LukCarm checks, Bombjack_x bets $1, AdrenalineJ folds, Dinostar15 folds, daz5daz5 folds, hella0uts folds, LukCarm folds.

SHOWDOWN
Bombjack_x wins $2.40.

 

[tenbob]

Ok ill wrap up this thread.

The turn was the K.

I bet the pot 700, UTG calls, folded to the button who raised to 3K, i push all in (no point slowing it at this stage, hes just commited to the hand), I shove, he calls.

He shows AK, hits another K on the river, and i win a huge pot.

Continued ............... https://www.cardschat.com/showthread.php?t=73478

 

[Four Dogs]

Nice pot, but did you check the flop?

 

[tenbob]

Nice pot, but did you check the flop?

Of course

 

[gord962]

I'm beginning to think checking is not such a bad option.

Seat 1: Dinostar15 ($42.60 in chips)
Seat 2: daz5daz5 ($17 in chips)
Seat 3: hella0uts ($28.50 in chips)
Seat 5: LukCarm ($97.50 in chips)
Seat 6: Bombjack_x [5C,5S] ($27.30 in chips)
Seat 7: buddha boy ($24.35 in chips)
Seat 8: AdrenalineJ ($11.65 in chips)
Seat 9: Emoryplaya ($21.85 in chips)
Seat 10: mikeybonz3 ($51.20 in chips)
ANTES/BLINDS
hella0uts posts blind ($0.15), LukCarm posts blind ($0.25).

PRE-FLOP
Bombjack_x calls $0.25, buddha boy folds, AdrenalineJ calls $0.25, Emoryplaya folds, mikeybonz3 folds, Dinostar15 calls $0.25, daz5daz5 calls $0.25, hella0uts calls $0.10, LukCarm checks.

FLOP [board cards 5H,7C,9S ]
hella0uts checks, LukCarm checks, Bombjack_x bets $1, AdrenalineJ folds, Dinostar15 folds, daz5daz5 folds, hella0uts folds, LukCarm folds.

SHOWDOWN
Bombjack_x wins $2.40.

A bit of a different situation as someone could have hit their straight already. You have to bet out here enough to see if someone has the straight. Also, if a 6 comes on the turn, I am not very comfortable putting $$ into the pot. But, if the 7 would have been a 4 (or less) I would have bet about .50 here. Make it look like a 'feeler' bet and keep the table interested and willing to call in attempt to hit their overcards. In the mean time, you have the possibility to triple the pot if everyone calls, which they probably will. You would not want to bet more than 1/2 the pot as that says you have hit your hand.

 

[colin_147]

If someone has 2 pair, you're going to get just as much or more money in the pot if you lead out anyway! You're not worried about 2 pair drawing out a full house on you, because at this point you're pretty much not going to be able to prevent 2 pair from playing. If they get lucky, so be it. But what about: 33, 44, 55, 66, 88, 56, 68, T8, JT. These are all hands that can become better than yours on the turn, but it's doubtful any of them would lead out with a bet. With 6 other limpers, plenty of these hands are very possible.

If it's checked around, a seemingly harmless 3 or 4 might hit the turn, and the player holding 33 or 44 just hit jackpot. Good luck getting away from the hand then. If you lead out, you might get called by a couple of straight drawing hands, but all those pocket pairs will almost definitely fold.

You are missing the point of the post. The plan here is to get chips into the pot and slow playing your set, leading out with a bet, followed by a caller is less likely to have more callers, as strengh has already been shown UTG, followed by a caller. Also, I didnt mention anywhere that this hand is unbeatable. Of course there is the possibilty of the outdraw, and you definitely dont want to be giving your opponents free cards with bottom set. If, in hindsight, you knew the hand was going to be checked around then of course you would bet out. But, as I said, its rare that 7 players will check the flop

I also disagree with your last comment. So you are telling me you would fold your 88 on that flop, followed by a UTG bet out and say a limper or 2? I certainly wouldnt

 

[ginNjuice]

I like leading out and betting my sets. In this situation I would have bet 3-400. Building a pot when I have a set is the 1st thing that's on my mind with a board like that. 8 10, J 9, 9 10, ect... are the types of hands you may be up against. You might even be lucky enough to find a donk with overcards that things the Q on the turn in good(if it comes and they catch it of course) I think you'd get about 3 calls making a pot of around 2000, depending on how much you bet. Not only have you built a nice pot for yourself, betting 1500-2000 is justified and will more often than not take that pot down. Being so early in the tournament and not having any reads at all, trying to set up a trap or slowplaying in any way is wrong here. Start building your chip stack and your aggressive image with this hand and be ready for a good day of poker.

 

[baystate123]

Officially, I voted lead out and bet. Which in most cases I would do. But in reality I would lean towards checking there and react accordingly. It's the 2nd hand of a tournament and in your position you should play it safe and see what people have in mind here and what the flow of the table is going to be. With 7 people in the hand, the table is fairly loose at the getgo so who knows what will happen with your raise. What are you going to do if he/they come over the top? All in with bottom set 2 hands into a tourney? Not me. I would feel pretty confident that someone will bet out. If you then want to represent you still can by check/raising.